Here’s your stance on Aikido, and correct me if I’m wrong here. Aikido has no unique principles and there are much better ways to learn the principles it does contain. Further, Aikido techniques themselves do not work against a “trained fighter”. Because they do not work, one has to go outside the art to bring back techniques or training methodologies that do.

I attempted to explain in my previous post (perhaps not well enough) that I do not train to face off against a “trained fighter”. To me, this seems to be where you’re coming from. That is, Aikido working in a “sparring” match in the dojo against another “trained fighter”. Aikido, Aikijujutsu or most traditional Japanese jujutsu systems in general do not focus on teaching their students to win in such situations. Training in kaeshiwaza is different.

Of course Judo has “sparring”, but all the best techniques are against the “rules” of these matches. Tomiki Aikido has “sparring” competitions as well, but again, most of the dangerous techniques have been removed for safety reasons. Other Aikido schools have randori and it serves the purpose pretty well, though not being perfect.

In my humble opinion, Aikido is no better or worse than any other art, each has their strengths and weaknesses. I don’t practice Aikido anymore myself, beyond occasional visits to a dojo I’m friendly with. The art I do practice is very similar in many respects however, and nothing I’ve said dramatically conflicts with my past or current experiences in Aikido.

Thus, I have laid out my explanations for why I do what I do and my thoughts on randori and resistance training in these traditional arts. If this is not a clear enough explanation for someone, I’m not sure I have anything else to say to try to convince them otherwise. Honestly, I really just don’t care that much anymore at this point in my training.

Speaking as a practioner of a hybrid that is probably closer to sanuces ryu than it is to true aiki jutsu and speaking as someone who has zero interest in participating in MMA I think that some sort of resistance/randori training is essential in testing my capabilities and the usefulness of the techniques I use. For instance when my uke does a sterotypical forward punch (and nothing else) as I step offline and send him flying with a beautifully executed kote gaeshi my confidence is built but I'm concerned that I'm also building a delusion. The reality is in the street most folks interested in pounding me to a pulp won't throw a punch and just stand there, they will be jabbing, biting, kicking, doing whatever it takes to knock me down. Maybe, my perspective is warped because I do outreach counseling in the inner city but the reality is many of the neighborhoods I go into have people who have honed their fighting skills in prison and for me to assume that I'm better trained than them is a naive and potentially dangerous belief to hold

Quote:

Of course Judo has “sparring”, but all the best techniques are against the “rules” of these matches. Tomiki Aikido has “sparring” competitions as well, but again, most of the dangerous techniques have been removed for safety reasons. Other Aikido schools have randori and it serves the purpose pretty well, though not being perfect.

Here's my frustration with that though. Even though in judo the dangerous techniques have been taken out and/or modified most judo techniques can be easily tweaked on the street to be extremely dangerous (e.g. using eri seoi-nage to drive a person straight down on their head instead of scooping your arms up at the end of the throw to protect uke's fall). Also with judo randori both partners are continuously attacking and defending. Since in aikido randori uke and tori take turns attacking and defending it still isn't quite as reality based. In general it seems that it might be a little harder to test aikido's effectiveness as compared to some other martial arts.All that to say, "Yes" I think that some sort of resistance training/randori, etc, is important as part of training.

I think what Tom is talking about isn't 'continuous attack' in the sense of 'uke keeps attacking and tori keeps throwing', but rather that uke attacks and tries NOT to be thrown by counterthrowing or other means (a la Judo). The circle drill is a fun one, but it's not really the same thing. Uke offers little to no resistence and once thrown, the next uke does the same. What Tom is saying, and he should correct me if I'm wrong, is that a more 'reality based' training should naturally include this resisting/countering element, as that is more likely to occur on the street.

--Chris

_________________________
"Seek not to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought."--Basho

A.J., let me begin by saying that, although I appreciated you input, I think it's unfair that you ask me to 'directly answer' your questions, and yet, even when I do so, you fail to give me the same courtesy. So again, based on this:

Quote:I’m interested in resolving (as quickly as possible) a spontaneous violent encounter in the real world where I have no choice but to fall back on my empty-hand skills as a last resort

As though somehow Aikido or JJJ is more 'reality based' than certain 'sporting' styles? Again, I would like to know what in particular makes an art that is mostly built on defensive techinques against wrist grabs and over commited punches any more 'reality based' than the MMA you contrast it to? If you answer nothing else, I honestly would like your take on this, because this is something I have heard from many, without it EVER being clarified.

A.J., you asked me to directly answer your question, and I did so, yet you fail to touch on any points I have raised, and then state that you "honestly just don’t care that much anymore this point in my training." Well, that's fine, but if you don't care enough to directly speak to points that conflict with your own, why even bother getting involved in the thread in the first place?

Quote:Here’s your stance on Aikido, and correct me if I’m wrong here.

Alright, I will correct you--it is wrong.You didn't ask me for my "stance on Aikido" you asked me for insights gained using Aikido in randori. Those are two diffirent things.

Quote:Aikido has no unique principles and there are much better ways to learn the principles it does contain.

Keepign what I said above in mind, I don't think I was clear enough when I said:

Quote:3. The priciples of Aikido are found in every other grappling art I've experianced.

I didn't mean that Aikido has nothing original to it. I was speaking here to kinesthetic principles, and trying to express that many feel that Aikido has some unique set of physical principles (as though when an Aikidoka does a wrist lock the body moves diffirently than, say, when I combatives guy does one). What I was speaking to here, was that I have found that the physical principles that guide Aikido are found in every other grappling art. The strategic and philosophic principles are another matter (and thread) all together.

Quote:Further, Aikido techniques themselves do not work against a “trained fighter”.

Yes, and that is largely because of the difference in training methodologies. Let me remind yout that in your first post, and subsequent posts, you have very much implied the same.

Quote: Because they do not work, one has to go outside the art to bring back techniques or training methodologies that do.

I don't recall saying anything about brining in techniques from other arts (not that I am necessarly opposed to it). By your admission Saotome has done this (with Shotokan strikes), as has Nishio to name another.

As for the training methodology thing, again I'm not sure one one have to go 'outside' Aikido for that either, what I meant when I said that (again, fault is mine here for not being clear enough), was you have to go outside "mainstream Aikido". Tomiki style Aikido already has this method of training, and method of applying Aikido in a fully resistive setting. That being said, if you can't find Tomiki (it's hard to come by), Judo is a perfectly fine option.And yes, I do feel you need the experiance of resistive randori in order to validate the utility of your techniques.

Quote: attempted to explain in my previous post (perhaps not well enough) that I do not train to face off against a “trained fighter”. To me, this seems to be where you’re coming from.

It was where I was coming from, because you asked me about my experiance of using Aikido in these settings, yes. I'm not suggesting that Aikido should be retooled for MMA competion, if that's what your thinking.

Quote: That is, Aikido working in a “sparring” match in the dojo against another “trained fighter”.

Why shouldn't Aikido work in shiai against, say, a Judoka? Ueshiba certainly proved it could. Why (and this goes back to my first question) should the ability to use Aikido against a competent martial artist detract from its self defence capabilities? It seem only logical that it would add to them.

Quote:That is, Aikido working in a “sparring” match in the dojo against another “trained fighter”. Aikido, Aikijujutsu or most traditional Japanese jujutsu systems in general do not focus on teaching their students to win in such situations.

Most Aikido and DR, yes. But you shouldn't lump "tradional Japenese jujutsu", despite the fact that so many do. Tradional JJJ did, in fact, practice shiai (competition sparring) regularly--and some koryu still do. If they did not, who would the Kodokan fought in their famous challenge? The fact is that many, many tradional ryu's, (both sword and jujutsu) at one time or another, have trained their members for the goal of winning shiai competion.

Quote:Of course Judo has “sparring”, but all the best techniques are against the “rules” of these matches.

I don't get this. What 'best techniques' are you refering to? Are you talking about those ones that are found in Koryu JJ? If so, those were allowed in those early Kodokan challenges I spoke of earlier. The Judo guys, with their 'inferior' (or 'not best') techniques ended up winning, even though the other ryu's were allowed to many try these techniques.

Quote:Tomiki Aikido has “sparring” competitions as well, but again, most of the dangerous techniques have been removed for safety reasons

Actually, the bread and butter techniques of Aikido are pretty much all practiced during Tomiki Style shiai. Here are the rules, along with the allowable techinques:

The other thing that strikes me as strange about this point of 'too dangerous to spar' is, not that you have said this here, Aikido is often refered to as 'the art of peace', or some other epithet which suggests the possiblility of a less destructive outcome to combat; that the techniques have the potential to end combat with little destruction to an opponent. If this is so, why doesn't this hold for resistive setting in the dojo, where people should be BETTER equiped to safely disengage before injury. Something doesn't line up here. Either the techniques are highly injurous, or they can be controlled by an experianced practioner and do little harm (in which case this should hold true for shiai). It's one or the other here folks.

Quote:Thus, I have laid out my explanations for why I do what I do and my thoughts on randori and resistance training in these traditional arts. If this is not a clear enough explanation for someone, I’m not sure I have anything else to say to try to convince them otherwise.

And now we come to the part of your post that disturbed me. You directly asked for me to speak to your point and I did so in good faith. You, for whatever reason, have not extended that courtesy. Your explanation is fine for your own reasons, but, lets be honest, you have failed to answer any questions posed of it. That's why it remains unclear to me. You haven't tried to actually clarify anyting in relation to any of my questions--instead you have just restated the same thing as though I never asked them.

--Chris

_________________________
"Seek not to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought."--Basho

What I would like you to clarify, if you would, is what in particular makes Aikido (or JJJ for that matter) more reality based than sporting styles (such as Judo, BJJ etc.)? What in particular, in your opinion, makes these styles less suitable for 'real world application'?

I'm wondering because you said:

Quote:I think we have two completely different mindsets here. I’m not interested in, or training for a competitive encounter. I’m interested in resolving (as quickly as possible) a spontaneous violent encounter in the real world where I have no choice but to fall back on my empty-hand skills as a last resort (i.e., I didn’t avoid the encounter, escape, bring a weapon, find one within reach, etc.).

And to clarify on my end, no, I don't think we have diffirent mindsets in this regard. I'm primarily interested in self defence as well, over competition.

--Chris

Edited by Ames (12/04/0805:54 PM)

_________________________
"Seek not to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought."--Basho

And to clarify on my end, no, I don't think we have diffirent mindsets in this regard. I'm primarily interested in self defence as well, over competition.

--Chris

Ditto from here. As I've already stated I have zero interest in participating in MMA (and my body is to beat up to compete in judo). But I do want the self defense techniques that I'm trained in to be as testable as possible. I am not at all knocking aikido/aiki jutsu but like it or not the MMA folks do a better job of "testing" their techniques by the nature of their competition. I realize that resistance, competion, etc. is anathema to many aikidoka's view of what "true aikido" is. But I think that those of us who do the aiki arts, even if we refuse to train with resistance/competition,etc, need to at least be intellectually honest about the potential lack of verifiability of the effectiveness of the techniquest that we believe we can defend ourselves with.

The arts themselves are no less reality based. Both BJJ and Judo are great arts and have plenty of standing waza, self-defense waza, etc. The problem is when the competitive training in these arts becomes the focus; that’s where the practicality often gets a bit compromised or placed on the backburner and the focus becomes sport. If I insinuated otherwise, that’s my fault for not being clearer.

My disagreement is when the shoe is put on the other foot. Aikido or other forms of traditional Japanese Jujutsu or Aikijujutsu (i.e. Daito-ryu and offshoots) are most assuredly looked upon as being less reality based, effective, and subsequently less worthy of study than other, more modern arts, because they don’t have a sporting, or readily apparent “sparring” aspect.

Aikido has all of the components that these other arts do. They are just taught and trained differently, perhaps less aggressively in some schools than others, and at different times in a students training (depending on the art), but they exist. Aikido (etc.) has:

1. Kihon Waza - Used to teach the fundamental techniques/principles of the art2. Jiyuwaza/Randori - Used to introduce and hone spontaneous application of the principles in a controlled environment3. Kaeshi Waza - Resistance training/application of the principles against an uncooperative participant in a less controlled environment (still not an considered an “opponent” or fellow “competitor” however)

To place a different perspective on this would be to consider that these same components are found in most classical Japanese weapons arts as well. To say for instance that Kendo is superior to classical Kenjutsu because they train regularly in competitive swordsmanship is equally as faulty as the current debate in my opinion. Just because Katori Shinto-ryu doesn’t strap on bogu and go at it doesn’t mean their kata only training hasn’t produced some of the most formidable swordsman in Japanese history.

To say that Aikido is faulty because someone couldn’t get their training to work for them, to me, only says they didn’t train correctly or long enough. Just like anything else worthwhile, you don’t become an expert or skilled in a year or two; it takes years and likely decades. No different than becoming a skilled carpenter or plumber.

Again, just my opinion here. Hope this clarifies a few things I may have not explained thoroughly enough.

Quote:To say that Aikido is faulty because someone couldn’t get their training to work for them, to me, only says they didn’t train correctly or long enough.

There is some merit to that statement. Part of the problem that MMA folk have had with Aiki folk is not neccessarily lack of skill, but rather an excessively long learning curve. But, as noted by AJ earlier, that may or may not be a factor for one's practice.

Quote:Just like anything else worthwhile, you don’t become an expert or skilled in a year or two; it takes years and likely decades.

True, although there is a big difference between functional and expert. Not everyone is trying to be an expert, but everyone training martial arts should be trying for functional. That can come quickly.

_________________________"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin